[Stock Doc]

Here are a couple of hints.

The H is to big [wide].
The end of the G up top doesn't go far enough.
The S is horrible and way out of proportion especially the center line.
Bottom right leg of the A is centered to the S below and should not be.

[Stock Doc]

Ok # 7 is a Fake also. This one when looking at it at a show or by itself can be a hard one also as they burned it in to give it the aged look. The key here is the letters height is how I lined these two up and that shows allot of differences in size before you even start to compare other points of this one. Rick B

[wilbur46]

This should definitely be a sticky.
It will be a great resource for the resto guys!
It is also the big reason I stick with shooters. $$$$$
I built 1 real nice rifle with the money from 1 real stock.

Addressing a couple of the replies, a fake is a fake! A resto, marked as such, is perfectly acceptable (in my opinion).
Tim Shufflin does these and they look very good.

[Stock Doc]

On to #8,,,, did you guess FAKE,, you are right. This is also a fake. Can you spot the differences on this one? Rick B

[rondog]

So, my question is.....if a guy has an old M1, with a stock that's completely devoid of ANY stamps of any kind, and obviously is a replacement or heavily sanded original, and this guy has NO intention of selling this rifle or ever representing it as original in any way, is it considered sacrilege to stamp that stock with reproduction stamps? Just to have them there for the "cool factor"?

I have a '43 Springfield with such a stock, and I'd love to sand and refinish it, with the cartouches stamped into it. Currently the wood is smooth as a baby's butt, not even the P on the grip. It's a grimy and beat-up looking stock too, might not be original but it's not new either. IMO, it's a perfect candidate to clean up, re-stamp, and refinish. But I don't want the world to dump on me for doing so. All the metal needs re-parked too. I can keep it as a gnarly-looking old beater, or make it look brand-new, which way to go?

[Stock Doc]

Let me try to answer this without it taking over the thread with a heated argument from folks.

1st it is yours to do as you like. The problem for a fact is when it gets sold or you die you will not remove it and it nor your family will and I know for a fact "it will" get sold as real somewhere down the road. No more is really need to be said on this. Rick B

[Stock Doc]

#9 is also a Fake. I know ,, you are wondering if any are real by this point but if you look back you will have that answer on your own"hint hint". Well lets see if you can find what is wrong on this one. Rick B

[rondog]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Stock Doc

Let me try to answer this without it taking over the thread with a heated argument from folks. 1st it is yours to do as you like. The problem for a fact is when it gets sold or you die you will not remove it and it nor your family will and I know for a fact "it will" get sold as real somewhere down the road. No more is really need to be said on this. Rick B

I suppose I'd be tickled enough to just refinish it with a good cleaning, light sanding and a good dosing of tung oil. If I ever get the nerve to mess with it. I also have a new Boyd's set in the box, but I can see that's going to take a lot of re-shaping in the grip area to get it like my other stock. It's stained a really dark color too, almost like it was dipped in stain.

[Stock Doc]

On to #10,, FAKE again. Notice the comparisons where the EMcF stamp on the Fake is larger than the real one and the cannons are smaller next to the same sized photos compared to the real one. They did a good job on the EMcF part but horrible with the cannons. Rick B

[rondog]

Wow! Very hard to tell the difference, at least to me. I've never understood counterfieters, just seems like a lot of work for a criminal.

Can I ask your opinion of Boyd's stocks? I have a new Garand set still in the box untouched, and I see their carbine set is only $80. I'm thinking of just putting my old stocks away and preserving them and using Boyd's instead. These aren't the Boyd's that have been re-worked by that other outfit (whose name escapes me at the moment) for the CMP.

[Stock Doc]

Yes to preserve your original stock is always a good idea. The Boyds are easy to tell from the inside cut and it is way to hard to make it look exact if that is your concern? Rick B

[rondog]

No, my concern is, are they a quality product? Do they require a LOT of fitting and fussing to get 'em to fit right and look good?

[Stock Doc]

It is a hit or miss some do and some don't. They seem to change their pattern so much that you never know which area is going to need fitting. Rick B

[rondog]

Stock Doc - Did ALL military issued M1 stocks have cartouches and inspection stamps? From what I can tell, my stock might be an HRA or maybe an Overton, did those have stamps or not?

Oh, DuPage was the name of the outfit that re-works the Boyds stocks for the CMP, that's who I was trying to think of.

[Dookiebutt]

Some of my Boyds stocks were plug and play. Some required significant work.

[Stock Doc]

All built Garands had a cartouche. Rebuilds usually had a DAS if done at Springfeild and the rest just had the arsenals stamp from the facility it was done at.. Rick B

[Mooseman684]

Thanks for all the Info Doc...Very educational !
I sent you a PM.
Rich